Is It Justifiable for Police to Use a Taser on a 10-Year-Old?

[Hurkyl]

I can't imagine you desire your police to be regarded as idiots,

I don't care about the latest public opinion fad. I want this police officer judged on whether or not he was doing his job, not whether or not he followed the latest fashions.

Last i checked a Polish immigrant was killed at one of your airports by a policeman who used taser gun. There is a video on youtube.

Again, so what?

 

[Sorry!]

This was in a small rural area in Arkansas. It's a bit of a different world there. But my question is still why would a 10 year old lying on the floor screaming need to be arrested? The officer should have just left, or called child welfare if he thought the child needed to be removed from the home for her own safety.

Can't be done Evo the police officer has to do his job. It doesn't matter about the age of the child it comes down to the mothers decision and she must have decided to have the child arrested and charged. The police officer can only suggest to the mother what to do he can't just be like 'ya right I'm not listening to you'. It doesn't work that way in any part of the world that I know of.

Regardless of that I think everyone skipped over my first post in this thread. They are continuing to speak of 'what are the risks' it doesn't matter about what the risks were he should never have thought that this incident has risen to the level which he has to use less lethal force. I've personally seen police officers struggle with offenders for 10 minutes before they even THINK about pulling out the taser/pepper spray.

No Ape you are right he shouldn't treat this girl like ordinary thugs. He should be more gentle with her she is just a little girl. I don't see how your comment justifies him using the taser... it seems rediculous to me to suggest that police should go around tasering everyone to arrest them.
If he tried to physically restrain her I highly doubt that she would have been hurt. Yes when a police officer puts cuffs on you it hurts a lot but they are trained specially to put the cuffs on children. They do not put them on to a child the same way they put them on to a grown person. If a cop can do this to subdue the child then what's to stop parents from using the exact same logic? "Oh she was going crazy it was all self-defense!" "It was for the good of the child that I tasered her."

Anyway the risk of using a taser on a child is that they have been shown to have a greater chance of a "serious cardiac event". One child who was tasered at 14 years had his heart stop and it took 4 attempts with a defib. to revive him. Obviously the incident levels are low because most police officers use their brain before subduing these hardened child criminals with a taser. This doesn't get rid of the fact that the taser is more likely to cause injury or death to a child. (there have been something like 250 deaths in America related to taser use? Possibly more I'm not sure.) The company that develops the tasers used warn of this risk and is suggests against use of the taser against small children or other at-risk people unless it is worth the risk of having the offender die. Is a small girl not wanting to go shower really worth killing her?

 

[Dembadon]

It all depends on the area and their laws. I actually had a co-worker who went to the police academy and was training to be an officer who was completely let loose and barred from consideration after he improperly handled a female juvenile during a ride along. Where I live it is nearly always necessary for a female officer to handle female suspects and detainees.

While I do not doubt your story, I think "sexual abuse" was misused by the poster to whom I was responding. I was merely pointing out how far one would have to go to be considered for sexual abuse charges.

 

[Sorry!]

I don't care about the latest public opinion fad. I want this police officer judged on whether or not he was doing his job, not whether or not he followed the latest fashions.

You must have missed my post the one about the use of force continuum? You can hardly be suggesting that he would have been able to use this type of force against a child... especialyl with all the recommendations against it UNLESS the police officer accepts that he must risk the child dying.

If this adds anything I'm pretty sure the police officer has been suspended and they are thinking about pressing criminal charges against him. (He apparently followed their departments procedures but I think that's BS just trying to make sure that the police still look good in public opinion if the FBI gets involved I'm sure it'll be shown otherwise)

 

[Hurkyl]

Regardless of that I think everyone skipped over my first post in this thread.

I would love to be enlightened about the real facts about taser usage versus other means of arresting a person. But it's hard to have any sort of enlightening discussion when you have people essentially shouting nothing more than "taser use = Evil".

Honestly, there probably wouldn't be much to say once everybody is on board with their reason rather than their hysteria.

 

[Evo]

I don't think that someone can just insist that someone be arrested, they would have to be assumed guilty of breaking some law. The officer did not have to arrest the child because the mother told him to. Either the article is leaving out something huge like the child had attacked the mother violently and was a danger to herself or others, or the officer should have judged if he should just leave or call child welfare to assess the situation.

 

[Pattonias]

I will mention that from the wording of the article he probably tried to restrain the girl before he used the taser. How else would he get kicked in the groin. He probably was not in the ideal state of mind after that point.

A female officer should have been present if at all possible. I don't think that anything inappropriate in that regard occurred, but a female officer would have been better able to work with the child in my opinion. I think given the circumstances a female officer would be better able to act as mediator.

 

[cristo]

Can't be done Evo the police officer has to do his job. It doesn't matter about the age of the child it comes down to the mothers decision and she must have decided to have the child arrested and charged. The police officer can only suggest to the mother what to do he can't just be like 'ya right I'm not listening to you'. It doesn't work that way in any part of the world that I know of.

Surely it's not up to the mother whether or not her child is breaking the law. The police officer made a decision as to whether the child was behaving illegally, or whether it was just the normal behaviour of a child. This should not be influenced by the fact that the mother cannot stand her childs' actions. Last time I checked, pissing off your mother is not an offence!

 

[WhoWee]

This was in a small rural area in Arkansas. It's a bit of a different world there. But my question is still why would a 10 year old lying on the floor screaming need to be arrested? The officer should have just left, or called child welfare if he thought the child needed to be removed from the home for her own safety.

Perhaps the mother and child should have been taken in for questioning (was the child abused - the mother did suggest the taser) and further evaluation. It's my opinion that if a mother needs to call the police to discipline a child, the mother is clearly not in control and another adult (perhaps the father?) should be called to retrieve the child. TOO MUCH DRAMA!

 

[cristo]

I don't think that someone can just insist that someone be arrested, they would have to be assumed guilty of breaking some law. The officer did not have to arrest the child because the mother told him to. Either the article is leaving out something huge like the child had attacked the mother violently and was a danger to herself or others, or the officer should have judged if he should just leave or call child welfare to assess the situation.

Great minds...

I agree with the last poster, a female officer should have been present if at all possible. I don't think that anything inappropriate in that regard occurred, but a female officer would have been better able to work with the child in my opinion.

Because women are better at dealing with children?

 

[Pattonias]

Surely it's not up to the mother whether or not her child is breaking the law. The police officer made a decision as to whether the child was behaving illegally, or whether it was just the normal behaviour of a child. This should not be influenced by the fact that the mother cannot stand her childs' actions. Last time I checked, pissing off your mother is not an offence!

I don't think there is anything illegal about throwing a temper tantrum in your home. Perhaps the groin kick is the source of the charges now, but I doubt that will hold water.

 

[DanP]

TOO MUCH DRAMA!

Its getting political. So expect everyone and their mothers do the drama.

 

[Dembadon]

What are the risks (injury or otherwise) of the officer physically subduing the girl?

Any criticism of taser use is completely meaningless without such a comparison.

You've brought an excellent perspective to this discussion.

I admit to being ignorant regarding the use of tasers and your post encouraged me to look them up. I saw a common denominator in the articles I read; if a person has a pre-existing heart condition, they can potentially cause problems. This is rare, however, and my findings may tip the scales in the favor of a grown man being more likely to harm a child by using other (physical) methods.

Thanks for your thoughts, Hurkyl.

 

[Sorry!]

I would love to be enlightened about the real facts about taser usage versus other means of arresting a person. But it's hard to have any sort of enlightening discussion when you have people essentially shouting nothing more than "taser use = Evil".

Honestly, there probably wouldn't be much to say once everybody is on board with their reason rather than their hysteria.

Real facts about taser usage:
They are less-lethal weapons employed by the some police officers.

Less-lethal weapons are to be used in situations where the police officer feels justified in using lethal force but thinks that by using less-lethal force he can difuse the situation without cause death.

Other less-lethal weapons include pepper spray, bean bags, rubber bullets and other chemical weapons. They use these types of weapons to control prison riots instead of just killing all the prisoners.

Police officers must really attempt to physically restrain the person before thinking about using the taser. It is not like if I resist arrest a police officer can just be like 'ok I'm going to tase you' it doesn't work that way.

Tasers have been shown to be problematic when used against smaller people or at-risk people. (Children) It has a higher chance of causing serious cardiac effects.

It has happened before when a child was tasered that they had their heart stop (more than once or twice).

The company that makes the tasers issues suggestions that officers should not use the taser against these type of people especially children unless it warrants the risk of the child dying (think if the child was holding a gun threatening to shoot her mom or herself).

What risk does a child pose curled on the ground throwing a tantrum? Who hasn't seen this happen before? Normally the only injury that results in this sort of behaviour isn't from the tantrum itself but from the swift *** beats that come after.Anyways since this officer even got kicked in the groin suggests to me that before he approached the girl he wasn't taking this event seriously. It is very rare that an officer will go to arrest a person and the person will have an opportunity to land a good hit on the officer because they are trained against these types of situations.

 

[DanP]

This is rare, however, and may tip the scales in the favor of a grown man being more likely to harm a child by using other (physical) methods.

Thanks for your thoughts, Hurkyl.

What do you mean by physical methods ? Knees in face and elbows in the spine ? Perhaps some neck cranks ? Sure, if that's applied by a LEO the poor kid would be killed from the second blow. But it doesn't have to be that way :P Do you ppl realize how easy is to immobilize a 10 years old without hurting him ?

 

[Dembadon]

...
Do you ppl realize how easy is to immobilize a 10 years old without hurting him ?

Or how easy it is to hurt them?

Nobody here can know what the right decision was as we were not on scene; I wrongfully jumped to a conclusion probably based on ignorance. I think the most important thing to consider is the fact that this officer may have avoided more serious injuries by "stinging" her.

 

[DanP]

Or how easy it is to hurt them?

Generations after generations of parents from all over the world had to deal with situations similar to the one described by Moonbear. I have yet to hear about a *single* case in which such a event ended up "hurting" the kid.

Perhapes we should start to distribute tasers to parents all over the world to be used as a kid calming method , if it's such a a wonderful mean to end a conflict without suffering.

 

[Sorry!]

Or how easy it is to hurt them?

Exactly the point. Using a taser on a child has been shown to have an increased risk for serious cardiac effects. Including having the heart completely stop leading to death. This happens in grown adults and this officer is using the same level of force to subdue the child. You are twisting the logic to a different misinformed conclusion I think.

A police officer is trained in a plethora of physical ways to restrain an individual. Yes some of them are fairly painful but so is getting tasered (have you ever been tasered? I have it's not fun).

It would have been fairly easy for a trained officer to position himself to control the childs legs, parents do it all the time without getting any sort of injuries. All it would take is one knee on top of the childs legs and for him to use his hands to control the rest of her. He does not need to use any more force unless your suggesting that this child could possibly physically injure the officer in combat? (which is rediculous)

 

[WaveJumper]

It is incredible that this issue is still being debated. It is shocking and frightening that such violent methods of establishing discipline on children are being favoured by intelligent individuals.

 

[DanP]

It is incredible that this issue is still being debated. It is shocking and frightening that such violent methods of establishing discipline on children are being favoured by intelligent individuals.

The herd of sheep is so terrified nowadays , that will let the Shepard dog do anything to them , in the hope the wise Shepard dog will think for them, and deliver them from the menace of the Big Bad Wolf.

The irony is that we live in a society where tasering a dog is considered a cruelty and will get you fined or imprisoned, but teasering a human baby is normal and defended by some members of the society.

 

[Hurkyl]

Less-lethal weapons are to be used in situations where the police officer feels justified in using lethal force but thinks that by using less-lethal force he can difuse the situation without cause death.

Is this meant to be a necessary condition, or a sufficient condition? That is, legally in the U.S., a taser may only be used when lethal force is justified?

I know that what justifies lethal force varies over time with the methods available, but that's beyond the scope of this thread.

But anyways, this is just law -- it doesn't really address the moral outrage people are having (whether they should have it or not). There's obviously some correlation, but the thing I would really like to know is the level of risk.

Obviously, people can die from taser use. But people can die simply from all sorts of trivial things too, so that doesn't tell us anything meaningful.

Also, knowing the level of risk of taser use doesn't tell us whether it's better or worse than some other approach -- to know that, we also have to know something about the risk of the other approach.

 

[Hurkyl]

It is incredible that this issue is still being debated. It is shocking and frightening that such violent methods of establishing discipline on children are being favoured by intelligent individuals.

Maybe if you debated intelligently, it would have been wrapped up by now.

The herd of sheep is so terrified nowadays , that will let the Shepard dog do anything to them , in the hope the wise Shepard dog will think for them, and deliver them from the menace of the Big Bad Wolf.

Er, this doesn't make any sense... you're the one being a sheep...

 

[Pattonias]

I just thought of this, but isn't the responsibility on the mother for involving the police in the first place. If this girl had been doing this somewhere else I could see this scenario happening in a slightly more reasonable light. The mother invited an outside source of authority because she, for whatever reason, could not or did not handle it herself. I think the results are more on her than the police. Why didn't she call her ex-husband or a relative? Why did she go straight to the local law enforcement?

 

[DanP]

Er, this doesn't make any sense... you're the one being a sheep...

Eh, you are then the Big Bad Wolf ?

 

[WaveJumper]

Maybe if you debated intelligently, it would have been wrapped up by now.

That's the intelligent reply i was expecting to see.

Er, this doesn't make any sense... you're the one being a sheep...

Same here.

 

[DanP]

Also, knowing the level of risk of taser use doesn't tell us whether it's better or worse than some other approach -- to know that, we also have to know something about the risk of the other approach.

Make a study on how many children died as a result of handling (with no violent intentions) by parents in the last millennium in similar cases. Peer review it, then we will have meaningful data.

 

[DanP]

I just thought of this, but isn't the responsibility on the mother for involving the police in the first place. If this girl had been doing this somewhere else I could see this scenario happening in a slightly more reasonable light. The mother invited an outside source of authority because she, for whatever reason, could not or did not handle it herself. I think the results are more on her than the police. Why didn't she call her ex-husband or a relative? Why did she go straight to the local law enforcement?

If foul play is involved , it makes no difference who invited who from the point of view of criminal law.

I can tell you "go break into that house" , but if you do, you can and will be hold accountable.

 

[Dembadon]

It is incredible that this issue is still being debated. It is shocking and frightening that such violent methods of establishing discipline on children are being favoured by intelligent individuals.

I don't think anyone here is fully onboard with the officer's choice in this particular case; however, I do think it's wise to admit that the account given in Borek's link may not be comprehensive, as Evo pointed out.

Tasering (if that's even a word) a child does sound a bit extreme at first, but none of us were on scene. As has already been mentioned, there could have been variables present which would have made other methods of restraint more dangerous. To assume that the article contains all the variables / facts would be a mistake.

 

[DanP]

I don't think anyone here is fully onboard with the officer's choice in this particular case; however, I do think it's wise to admit that the account given in Borek's link may not be comprehensive, as Evo pointed out.

This was pointed time and again by many persons in this thread, and there are some legitimate cases where a taser might be a good solution , and I enumerated them.

The issue is that some ppl defend taser use in general by implying it may be "safer" on the child than the time tried and tested approach of gentle but firm restraining of the child. As I pointed to you in a previous answer, this was done by parents all over the world in all times.

Makes you really wonder how the heck our parents managed whiteout tasers :P

But, you can at any time make experiments. Procreate a children. When he is 10 and you need to discipline him a little, tase him. Se how it feels. Move the child gently butfirmly. See how it feels. Tase again if you are not satisfied.

Try a taser on yourself. See the amount of pain inflicted. Then compare with a gentle but firm push from a parent. I also wonder if the Chief of Police always used tasers on his children when he needed to discipline them a little because they wouldn't wash their hands. Or if he handcuffs his children or pin them to the earth. Or if he just used old and tried method of parental control, like a loving parent would do.

 

[Evo]

This was pointed time and again by many persons in this thread, and there are some legitimate cases where a taser might be a good solution , and I enumerated them.

The issue is that some ppl defend taser use in general by implying it may be "safer" on the child than the time tried and tested approach of gentle but firm restraining of the child. As I pointed to you in a previous answer, this was done by parents all over the world in all times.

Makes you really wonder how the heck our parents they managed whiteout tasers :P

But, you can at any time make experiments. Procreate a children. When he is 10 and you need to discipline him a little, tase him. Se how it feels. Move the child gently butfirmly. See how it feels. Tase again if you are not satisfied.

Try a taser on yourself. See the amount of pain inflicted. Then compare with a gentle but firm push from a parent.


I also wonder if the Chief of Police always used tasers on his children when he needed to discipline them a little because they wouldn't wash their hands. Or if he handcuffs his children or pin them to the earth. Or if he just used old and tried method of parental control, like a loving parent would do.

Since we don't know the details, this is going off on a bit of a tangent.

 

[Hurkyl]

The issue is that some ppl defend taser use in general by implying it may be "safer" on the child than the time tried and tested approach of gentle but firm restraining of the child.

Who did that?

Without evidence in hand, one should object both to claims that tasers are riskier and to claims that tasers are safer.

If I had noticed, I would have objected. (Or, I might not have bothered, if someone else already addressed it)

When I have objected to your ridiculous posts, it's not because I believe in the opposing position -- it's because your posts are ridiculous.

 

[DanP]

Since we don't know the details, this is going off on a bit of a tangent.

Nevertheless , it covers the general case , and hence it covers the in general the "debate" of what is safer,
teasering a child, or doing what Moonbear did with her step-nephew, and what parents in this world do.

We do no know what exactly happened in this particular case, but I feel pretty safely when I
state that in general, normal parenting methods used until today, are pretty safe, they don't kill children or harm them , and no sane parent would consider whatever a taser if safer and better to use over this method.

 

[DanP]

When I have objected to your ridiculous posts, it's not because I believe in the opposing position -- it's because your posts are ridiculous.

Dont worry, Your posts are also ridiculous.

Now, if youll do the research I asked, we can continue the conversation your way , comparing teaser risk, vs the normal methods used in parenting.

 

[Borek]

Looks like I have finally managed to start a thread that will get locked because of the flame war! Yippee-ki-yay

 

[DanP]

Who did that?

See below. My bold.

You've brought an excellent perspective to this discussion.

I admit to being ignorant regarding the use of tasers and your post encouraged me to look them up. I saw a common denominator in the articles I read; if a person has a pre-existing heart condition, they can potentially cause problems. This is rare, however, and my findings may tip the scales in the favor of a grown man being more likely to harm a child by using other (physical) methods.

Thanks for your thoughts, Hurkyl.

While it is somewhat prudent formulation, it leans towards taser use.

 

[DanP]

Who did that?

See below. My bold.

You've brought an excellent perspective to this discussion.

I admit to being ignorant regarding the use of tasers and your post encouraged me to look them up. I saw a common denominator in the articles I read; if a person has a pre-existing heart condition, they can potentially cause problems. This is rare, however, and my findings may tip the scales in the favor of a grown man being more likely to harm a child by using other (physical) methods.

Thanks for your thoughts, Hurkyl.

While it is a somewhat prudent formulation, it leans towards taser use.

 

[Evo]

Borek wins! He is now a member of the thread killer's club.

 

[russ_watters]

Borek wins! He is now a member of the thread killer's club.

Technically speaking, Borek didn't kill the thread, he only started a thread that got killed!